Choices in Embedded Linux: Commercial or Roll Your Own

Making the Choice

February 27, 2004

Over the past week, Red Hat and Wind River's upcoming embedded Linux OS has
generated considerable industry buzz. Yet there are many other commercial
solutions already on the market in the embedded Linux space. There's also the "roll
your own" approach, relying on "free" open source components. So what's the
best route for a developer to take?

The answer is highly individual, industry observers say. Factors coming into
play can include the company's financial budget and inhouse technical
resources, as well as desired time to market, and the reasons for creating the
embedded device in the first place.

In fact, this sort of flexibility is one of the key drivers behind embedded
Linux, according to Tim Riker of Texas Instruments (TI). Device-makers can move
between packaged solutions and open source componentry. while avoiding
getting locked in to a single brand.

A related advantage is that "Linux covers so many CPUs and chips," said David
Mandala, also of TI, speaking at the recent Consumer Electronics Show (CES).
Linux has been tested for hardware ranging from Intel to MIPS, StrongArm, and
Sparc, Mandala noted.

Other frequently cited benefits of embedded Linux, in comparison to other
embedded OS, include lower costs, greater reliability, and better capabilities
for product differentiation.

However, embedded Linux is a complex development environment, and this
complexity can bring hidden costs, others say. "Free software" does not mean that
"bits just fall like great manna from heaven," cautioned Bill Weinberg, director
of product and technical marketing for MontaVista Software.

Many do-it-yourselfers are simply "looking for the cheap way," echoed Craig
Hollabaugh, author of the book Embedded Linux: Hardware, Software, and
Interfacing. "They see free as being zero dollars."

Yet a "collaborative" approach can also be quite wise, suggested TI's Riker.
Companies can "leverage what the (open source) community has done," while also
giving back to the community. At the same time, they can "focus their dollars
on the pieces that are differentiators for them."

Some contend that, to add to the complexity, the embedded Linux market
remains much more fragmented that desktop Linux, which is already dominated by two
main distributions: Red Hat and SuSE Novell.

Weinstein pointed to several factors that can prompt a decision for or
against embedded Linux: management imperatives; internal Linux advocates on the
development side, or, at the other extreme, embedded Linux "horror stories."

Large companies with management imperatives sometimes build embedded Linux
"skunkworks" projects, using evaluation packages or older code, Weinstein said.
After these projects turn out to be serviceable, "then, that's where we come
in."

As one horror story, Weinstein mentioned a large telecom company which has
already spent $1.6 million on in-house Linux development without creating a
deployable solution.

Yet under other sets of circumstances, "roll your own can be good," Weinstein
acknowledged.